Alternative circuits on agro-food markets

The increasing development of alternative forms in production, marketing and consumption in the agrifood sector make us to reflect on how these different modalities can be explained with a model of production and consumption in which the neoclassical theory of supply and demand is still central in explaining individual and collective behavior. The analysis starts by developing a taxonomy of "alternative" market systems to identify specific characteristics of producers and consumers. The taxonomy of "alternative" systems market concerns the identification and description of "alternative" markets and the definition of features that may characterize the markets in order to put them in a taxonomic classification. Among the common features of the markets we find the type of product, usually food, whose quality characteristics are defined by the producer‐consumer interaction. The alternative marketing channels are usually locally based. The experiences analyzed are developed according to the logic of communicative rationality which is explain by the economic theory of the agency. In some cases the communicative rationality is more evident, in other less, but in all cases is based on direct contact between producers and consumers. In this analysis, the need to make a critical reading of the market economic theory, in the light of the diversity that exists in human behavior, has been central, trying to build an interpretation model of the consumption and production systems. Starting from the analysis of the mechanisms leading to the choice of alternative agri‐food markets, it has been possible to develop an explanation for the differences in the behavior of producers and consumers based on the theories of the Gaussian distribution of populations. This idea was verified by direct analysis, through questionnaires given to the users of different way of commerce like buying groups, adoption of product, Farmer's Market, Earth Markets. For the formulation of the questionnaires were considered different socio‐economic variables useful to create the bases to understand social behavior of both producers and consumers. This paper highlights heterogeneity in the behavior of actors in the economic system showing experiences where the communication and definition of quality criteria, shared by producer and consumer, allows the survival of small local farms.